User not logged in - login - register
Home Calendar Books School Tool Photo Gallery Message Boards Users Statistics Advertise Site Info
go to bottom | |
 Message Boards » » President Obama's credibility watch Page 1 ... 181 182 183 184 [185], Prev  
NyM410
J-E-T-S
49046 Posts
user info
edit post

Um, this thread is full of disapproval on a lot of Obama’s foreign AND domestic policy by the exact same people you are accusing as being cult members.

5/9/2018 7:57:12 AM

rjrumfel
All American
21412 Posts
user info
edit post

So Obama, in his letter, indicates that his deal does not have an expiration date. That may be true for the overall deal, but the one thing everyone against the deal is concerned about is the time limit for which they have enrichment restrictions imposed. Per wikipedia, that time limit is 15 years:

Quote :
"After fifteen years, all physical limits on enrichment will be removed, including limits on the type and number of centrifuges, Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium, and where Iran may have enrichment facilities. According to Belfer, at this point Iran could "expand its nuclear program to create more practical overt and covert nuclear weapons options".[61][67]"


All this to increase the breakout time to 1 year, from its current range of 2-3 months. But after 15 years, some experts believe they will be able to go back to the 2-3 month timeframe, or even quicker.

Why even put a time limit? Why not just leave the enrichment restrictions in perpetuity? The deal plainly gives them enough leverage to research and produce energy for civilian consumption.

[Edited on May 9, 2018 at 9:40 AM. Reason : dajld]

5/9/2018 9:38:42 AM

NyM410
J-E-T-S
49046 Posts
user info
edit post

Presumably because they couldn’t negotiate that. Do you think Obama or the other participants had mind-control power? If they got everything they wanted it wouldn’t be a diplomatic deal.

5/9/2018 11:11:57 AM

rjrumfel
All American
21412 Posts
user info
edit post

So I guess the idea was to kick the can down the road, and hope we'll be in a better position 15 years from now to deal with a threat?

Look, I'm not poo-pooing the Iran deal. Personally I can take it or leave it. I just have a raised eyebrow with some of the provisions.

And of course this all assumes that Iran will be above-the-board with everything. If you take Bibi at heart, with all of his ppt slides, they have not been above-the-board.

5/9/2018 11:44:31 AM

NyM410
J-E-T-S
49046 Posts
user info
edit post

Nothing he presented was from after 2003! We knew all this already. It was a ruse to solidify dumbass in the White House to pull out.

5/9/2018 12:05:57 PM

dtownral
All American
25065 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"So Obama, in his letter, indicates that his deal does not have an expiration date. That may be true for the overall deal, but the one thing everyone against the deal is concerned about is the time limit for which they have enrichment restrictions imposed. Per wikipedia, that time limit is 15 years:"


obama explains this in his letter in the same paragraph where he explains, "Even as some of the provisions in the JCPOA do become less strict with time, this won’t happen until ten, fifteen, twenty, or twenty-five years into the deal, so there is little reason to put those restrictions at risk today."

additionally, it's an extraordinarily dumb reason to back out of the agreement. the things that iran can't do for 10, 15, 20, or 25 years are now things they can do in 0 years, they can do them right now! Instead of having 10, 15, 20, or 25 years to develop a continuing agreement we now have 0 years to work on a new agreement!

If the sunset timelines are your objection to the deal, backing out of the deal only makes that position worse

5/9/2018 12:27:52 PM

rjrumfel
All American
21412 Posts
user info
edit post

Thanks, I did not know his data was that old.

5/9/2018 2:02:36 PM

dtownral
All American
25065 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"
@JackPosobiec
2h2 hours ago
Good morning to everyone except Barack Obama who we are still going to impeach"

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/998919640989519873

Quote :
"
@JackPosobiec
24h24 hours ago
Let's get #ImpeachObama trending!"

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/998582531896332288

Obama +credibility for apparently still being the president

5/22/2018 11:09:59 AM

HCH
All American
3572 Posts
user info
edit post

Some of the responses are hilarious/depressing:

Quote :
"
Michael Q. Public
? @Michael87506990
3h3 hours ago
Replying to @JackPosobiec

Why would you impeach a "former" President? Wouldn't that be a colossal waste of Congress' time? They don't have the power to impose punishment or a prison sentence. Better to prosecute through the criminal justice system where he can get the justice he deserves."

2 replies 1 retweet 9 likes
Z
?
Quote :
" @carefulone


I think they would impeach to stop him from ever holding office ever again. So...it’s really not a waste of time. Just what I have been reading. ?????"

5/22/2018 1:18:09 PM

A Tanzarian
drip drip boom
9669 Posts
user info
edit post

Is this an attempt to frame a Trump impeachment as political retaliation instead of high crimes and misdemeanors?

5/22/2018 2:30:35 PM

Exiled
Eyes up here ^^
5829 Posts
user info
edit post

I feel like this should go here, just a notice from cosmic karma about credibility:

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/388790-sinkhole-develops-on-white-house-lawn

5/22/2018 2:49:23 PM

Cabbage
All American
1007 Posts
user info
edit post

^It's not a sinkhole, it's Melania attempting to escape.

5/22/2018 6:24:59 PM

Pupils DiL8t
All American
4225 Posts
user info
edit post

Would anyone care to break down this Senate GOP report on the Obama administration's efforts to allow Iran to convert its assets through U.S. financial insitutions as part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action?

https://www.portman.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?a=files.serve&File_id=32D41C7F-5D2F-43F3-BDE4-F532AC942BCB

6/6/2018 2:39:08 PM

HCH
All American
3572 Posts
user info
edit post

Don't misconstrue this as a pass for Trump's zero tolerance policy, but it's a shame to see that we have been splitting immigrant families long before Trumps presidency. And now, the abuses in these facilites are finally being reported.

Quote :
"Immigrant children as young as 14 housed at a juvenile detention center in Virginia say they were beaten while handcuffed and locked up for long periods in solitary confinement, left nude and shivering in concrete cells."


https://apnews.com/afc80e51b562462c89907b49ae624e79

What sort of legacy will Obama have after the next 3 years? And just as shameful, how is anyone to trust the media on any sort of reporting, when time and again it is shown that they were not reporting on atrocities and abuses during the Obama administration. Even the article above indicates that the abuses occurred during the Trump administration.

6/21/2018 12:07:35 PM

NyM410
J-E-T-S
49046 Posts
user info
edit post

They did. There are hundreds of publications that did pay attention to it on an ongoing basis.

Just because you didn’t see it and conservative media spent the entire 8 years yelling about FEMA death camps and Benghazi doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

** also, it shouldn’t matter but Trumps rhetoric brings far more attention to it. If Obama was calling illegal immigrants rapists, animals and things that are infesting our country obviously coverage would be different

[Edited on June 21, 2018 at 12:17 PM. Reason : But you know that ]

6/21/2018 12:14:55 PM

HCH
All American
3572 Posts
user info
edit post

I must have missed the Time magazine cover with Obama standing over a beaten and bruised immigrant.

Better question. If this was reported by "hundreds of media outlets", why the selective outrage from your side?

[Edited on June 21, 2018 at 12:17 PM. Reason : 1]

6/21/2018 12:16:51 PM

NyM410
J-E-T-S
49046 Posts
user info
edit post

The policies are different, the rhetoric is different and the end goal is different.

Obama was derisively called the “deporter in chief” by lots on the left.

6/21/2018 12:19:40 PM

Bullet
All American
24839 Posts
user info
edit post

lol, of course HCH would irrelevantly bump this thread regarding this issue

6/21/2018 12:23:12 PM

HCH
All American
3572 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
" also, it shouldn’t matter but Trumps rhetoric brings far more attention to it. If Obama was calling illegal immigrants rapists, animals and things that are infesting our country obviously coverage would be different"


I don't disagree with this at all. And this is the issue that a lot of people on the right are raising. Obama was able to get away with running Abu Ghraib for immigrant children, but there was no outrage because Obama doesn't make a big deal of it. Where is the fourth estate during all this?

I think everyone can agree that our immigration system is broken, but it's just now coming to light how badly the system is broken. The problem is, we weren't really talking about this at a national level during Obama's presidency. Why is that? If Trump didn't make immigration a key issue during the campaign (for much of the wrong reason), would we still be discussing this today? Probably not, especially if a democrat was elected.

6/21/2018 12:32:49 PM

JesusHChrist
All American
4301 Posts
user info
edit post

Never believe that anti-[immigrants] are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-[immigrants] have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.


He's just asking questions, guys. There's no deeper motive behind it. None at all.

6/21/2018 12:58:57 PM

Pupils DiL8t
All American
4225 Posts
user info
edit post

^ I was reminded of this quote while reading his arguments.

Quote :
"Obama was derisively called the 'deporter in chief' by lots on the left."


While, at the same time, the right was criticizing him for being too soft on immigration. Somehow, it's become convenient for the right to recognize that he wasn't as soft on immigration as they would have once led us to believe.

6/21/2018 2:50:58 PM

dtownral
All American
25065 Posts
user info
edit post

the right criticized him for being soft on immigration and wanting an open border then blamed trump's policy on obama

6/21/2018 3:23:50 PM

0EPII1
All American
41203 Posts
user info
edit post



[Edited on June 22, 2018 at 3:35 PM. Reason : Obama != Trump]

6/22/2018 3:22:33 PM

HCH
All American
3572 Posts
user info
edit post

He made some fantastic statements about the evils of identity politics. Its unfortunate he couldnt realize this whil actually in power.

Quote :
"“You can’t do this if you just out-of-hand disregard what your opponents have to say from the start,” he said. “You can’t do it if you insist that those who aren’t like you because they’re white or because they’re male, that somehow there’s no way they can understand what I’m feeling, that somehow they lack standing to speak on certain matters.”"

7/18/2018 3:37:47 PM

 Message Boards » The Soap Box » President Obama's credibility watch Page 1 ... 181 182 183 184 [185], Prev  
go to top | |
Admin Options : move topic | lock topic

© 2019 by The Wolf Web - All Rights Reserved.
The material located at this site is not endorsed, sponsored or provided by or on behalf of North Carolina State University.
Powered by CrazyWeb v2.37 - our disclaimer.